So…Richard Dawkins seems to still be a hypocrite
One simply has to love the “New Atheists” for their sheer muddle-headedness. On one hand, such men as these deny with the utmost conviction the existence of God, Jesus, and all other concepts of the divine. On the other hand, they desire to live in a world informed by the moral systems that man’s belief in the supernatural, especially Christian belief, has inspired — a world which cares for its poor and its sick, and world in which there is justice.
That is not, of course, the Darwinian way, in which life is said to be “nasty, brutish, and short.” It would seem that Richard Dawkins, in particular, does not wish to confront the fact that every time his philosophical standpoint has been explored to its fullest, most logical outcome, the result has tended toward the nasty and brutish.
As I have often said before, as a scientist I am a passionate Darwinian. But as a citizen and a human being, I want to construct a society which is about as un-Darwinian as we can make it. I approve of looking after the poor (very un-Darwinian). I approve of universal medical care (very un-Darwinian).
This is called “wanting to have your cake and eat it too,” O Reader, and it’s very unbecoming to see a learned Oxford professor engaging in such philosophical hypocrisy…especially when in most other arenas, said Oxford professor has been a passionate evangelist for atheism and the deconstruction of religion in the world. What business does such a man have in demanding that all the social awareness which Religion — especially Christianity — has encouraged be retained even as the religion itself is jettisoned?
No Comments Comments Feed
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
The comments are closed.